effective atmosphere, derivative story

Rating: Null/10 (21 December 2003)

`28 Days Later' could easily be the fourth installment in George Romero's `Living Dead' trilogy  only this time the zombies have a bit more get up and go to them.
When Jim wakes up out of a coma one day, he discovers that not only is he the only person in the hospital but virtually the only person left in the entire city of London. After wandering through the deserted city streets for awhile, he eventually runs into a couple of stalwart survivors who inform him that 28 days earlier a plague began sweeping across the planet  catalyzed by the release of some infected test monkeys  causing people to turn into mindless killing machines and passing on the virus to their victims through their blood.
Although `28 Days Later' is little more than a rip-off of those earlier zombie classics, director Danny Boyle does bring a certain level of artistry to his handling of the material, particularly with his apocalyptic visions of a London and an English countryside utterly bereft of human beings. There's a real end-of-the-world eeriness to much of what we see on the screen, a product more of suggestiveness than of blatant visualization. Indeed, Boyle shows the zombies as little as possible, a wise move for a couple of reasons: first, because leaving a threat unspecified allows the audience to use its imagination, thereby heightening the suspense and tension, and, second, because, quite frankly, these fleet-footed zombies simply aren't all that terrifying when we get a close-up view of them (certainly not on a level with Romero's lumbering  and truly horrifying - originals). And that, perhaps, is the biggest complaint I have against the film. For all the impressiveness of the visuals and the tone, `28 Days Later' just isn't a very scary film in the long run. The plotting is derivative, the characters not very well developed, and the poorly staged final showdown more laughable than frightening. Like two many horror films, this one suffers from a weak third act, with the anticipatory windup more impressive than the delivery.
There's a lot to admire and recommend in `28 Days later.' But it just doesn't get under the skin the way the best horror films do  and the nightmares just don't come.